Talk:Redskinium
Reference Given all the in-jokes in the periodic table, isn't it more likely that this was named after the Washington Redskins and not vermilion? --From Andoria with Love 03:07, 9 April 2009 (UTC) : I didnt read the funny parts in the periodic table as it is impossible to make out. But the vermilion reference could be very valid, given that mercury does occur in deposits throughout the world as cinnabar - which is the source of the red pigment vermilion. It could, of course, be a hybrid of both...the red for the color and because it is mercury and the Redskins as the other joke. Who knows. It's all speculation anyway, but I figure since Star Trek does like to incorporate things rooted in science somewhat, the red in Redskinkium connected to Hg would make perfect sense. It totally made sense to me why they used Redskinium to refer to this element that has the exact same symbol of Hg. – Distantlycharmed 04:08, 9 April 2009 (UTC) ::Note shouldn't even exist unless it's from a source — Morder 04:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC) Isnt that why it's italicized? I noticed those throughout various articles. Should they all be removed? I dont think you should have removed it. It was an interesting note to make and it was in italics to make sure that people know it is not canon. – Distantlycharmed 04:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC) ::It's italicized because it's a background note that doesn't need an entire background header. It may be interesting but it's not based on facts and we can't list all the different things it might be named after - as shran pointed out it could be the redskins. Unless a source, like Okuda or Sussman, comes out and states it was named after such-and-such it's speculation and doesn't belong. — Morder 04:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC) There are numerous such italicized sections that are speculating. Should I then assume they are all invalid and don't belong there and need to be removed? I just want to make sure how this works because I keep seeing contradictory info on that a lot. Sometimes its ok, sometimes it isnt. It's confusing. Thanks. – Distantlycharmed 04:30, 9 April 2009 (UTC) ::It's not 'OK' but a lot of notes still exist since policy was written after. If they're suspect or don't have a source move them to the talk page. — Morder 04:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC) :::Well, a lot of the elements are pretty clear cut. It's obvious what they're named after, such as Daffyduckium. Common sense dictates that one is named after Daffy Duck. As was pointed out, however, redskinium has more than one possible reference, so perhaps the note should just be left off. --From Andoria with Love 12:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC) Redux :The element is named after the football team. An anon just added the above to the article's background section uncited. Does anyone have a source for this information or should it be removed from the article? --| TrekFan Open a channel 15:06, April 19, 2014 (UTC) :If they had a reference, they should have added it. Its been up there for a while now again without anyone adding a reference, so per all the above discussion I've removed it again. -- Capricorn (talk) 20:16, October 8, 2015 (UTC)